Clojure has native interoperability with JVM & CLR. This mean that you can have part of your code written in Clojure, part in Java/Jython/ JRuby if your target the JVM or C# if you target CLR. Of course you'll not be able to mess everything like first half of a method in Clojure, second half in java but this is going to work.
Clojurescript might bring you interroperability with JS too. The best blurb language then is going to be java because support for it is part of the clojure design. But adding a new arbitrar language to this equation is going to be very costly. Also you don't only want interroperability you want to have a translation to idiomatic blurb code and back to idiomatic clojure. There is no offering for this right now and this would need lot of time to do it properly. And from my understanding, I see no other language that bring such support you ask for. This is not a feature that clojure lack. Maybe its me, but I do not see it as a a top priority for clojure language. We already have support with JVM, CLR. If required to any language through a network protocol. With Java/Clojure combination you can do nearly everything and have library for nearly everything too. Life is great ! On 29 sep, 12:39, Hank <h...@123mail.org> wrote: > Hi, > > I'd like to check the interest in the community for a comprehensive > Clojure library/framework/whathaveyou that helps produce Java/Python/ > Ruby/... a.k.a. "Blub" (http://www.paulgraham.com/avg.html) code, i.e. > instead of writing a Clojure program that e.g. produces web pages, > writing a Clojure program that produces a Blub program that produces > web pages. A Blub program in idiomatic, maintainable, efficient Blub > code that is. > > This is obviously to enable cooperation on shared domain > knowledge/"business logic" across communities with mixed Clojure/Blub > language preferences that I expect will continue to exist for decades. > Full cooperation would then also require the framework to produce > Clojure code that embodies functionality embodied in Blub code. I'd > expect that bit to be harder to realize but also more valuable, as it > would allow drawing not only on the body of work done in Blub for > reasons of preference but also on legacy code from the dark ages when > there was no Clojure. > > I'm asking this especially in light of the upcoming Clojure Conj where > there would be an opportunity to discuss this complex subject in a > "high bandwidth" :) kind of way. > > Searching this group I haven't found much along those lines other than > isolated problems being tackled -- the question here rather being: > What's the furthest the the envelope can be pushed in terms of co- > opting the Blub world? > > Hank -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
